Mixed review on cx 90

SC300Es said:

Unless your car is more than 5 years old or has a lot of miles is there really a reason to get a new one?

I read up on a lot of different auto forums and the pattern that I see most often is how much people like to get into debt in order to get the latest and the greatest. I feel that if one owns a vehicle that is between 1-5 years old, unless it’s a lease, there is no reason to go sign up for another loan. I see people trade in year old Tellurides in order to get the new updated dash or even a new color. Maybe I don’t drive enough to enjoy the latest and the greatest these cars offer these days.

Click to expand...

sagsol1 said:

Drove base model today found steering and brake inputs a little more linear than cx 9. Somewhat smoother and more refined. Steering ratio too slow. Transmission has odd clunk in low speed engagement. Rear window visibility worse. Lincoln Navigator like front grille and odd swept back profile. Loaded cx 90 turbo vs turbo S 55 and 61k! I stop feature annoying. Would I get one? Not for the price. Cx 9 GT was 45k. You need to spend 10 to 15k more for same car. I love my cx 9, my second one, don’t think it’s worth that much more. I suspect many other current owners will have similar impression. It also weighs 300-500lbs more than cx-9. Wow! 4900lbs. For turbo S. How did it gain 500lbs? I think Mazda could have done a better job at a better price. For 61k other manufacturers have some very competitive cars that aren’t trying to go upscale. I wish Mazda luck. I think a lot of new pricey cx-90’s will be sitting on lots without strong purchase incentives. I’m keeping my cx-9.

Click to expand...

sagsol1 said:

Drove base model today found steering and brake inputs a little more linear than cx 9. Somewhat smoother and more refined. Steering ratio too slow. Transmission has odd clunk in low speed engagement. Rear window visibility worse. Lincoln Navigator like front grille and odd swept back profile. Loaded cx 90 turbo vs turbo S 55 and 61k! I stop feature annoying. Would I get one? Not for the price. Cx 9 GT was 45k. You need to spend 10 to 15k more for same car. I love my cx 9, my second one, don’t think it’s worth that much more. I suspect many other current owners will have similar impression. It also weighs 300-500lbs more than cx-9. Wow! 4900lbs. For turbo S. How did it gain 500lbs? I think Mazda could have done a better job at a better price. For 61k other manufacturers have some very competitive cars that aren’t trying to go upscale. I wish Mazda luck. I think a lot of new pricey cx-90’s will be sitting on lots without strong purchase incentives. I’m keeping my cx-9.

Click to expand...

InlineSix said:

Aren’t you on the Telluride forum from way back? I recognize your username, I think

Click to expand...

SC300Es said:

Yup. Like I said I do visit various forums. My wife and I can't meet in the middle with the captains chairs vs top trims on the Kia. Same situation here.

Click to expand...